Lewisham Council (202419769)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202419769

Lewisham Council

28 November 2024

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Reports of leaks, damp and mould.
    2. The complaint.

Background

  1. The resident holds a secure tenancy with the landlord in a ground-floor 2-bedroom flat with her two young children. The tenancy commenced in June 2021. The resident has health conditions including fibromyalgia, eye and skin problems, and advised her children have breathing difficulties.
  2. In December 2021 the landlord raised a job for a damp and mould inspection, and  it appeared a mould wash and redecoration was carried out on 31 March 2022. On 1 December 2022, the resident reported a leak. The landlord inspected this and confirmed there was an active leak in the kitchen from the property above. It also found mould in the hallway, living room and bathroom and noted that a wall vent needed to be fitted in the kitchen, along with other remedial works. On 12 December 2022 the resident made a formal complaint about leaks, damp and mould. She added she had young children and felt her report should have been treated as an emergency. She said the issue was reported last year but remained unresolved.
  3. On 3 January 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 response. It apologised for any inconvenience caused and said it had liaised with its damp and mould team who carried out an inspection in December 2022 and found there was an active leak. It noted a plumber had attended and resolved the leak in the kitchen. It added its damp and mould team would contact the resident by 11 January 2023 to schedule remedial works.
  4. On 16 January 2023 the resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 2. She explained she had not heard back from its damp and mould team. She confirmed a plumber resolved the leak in the kitchen, but was told that the damp and mould was due to a structural issue with the building. She added this was a reoccurring problem and frequently ran a dehumidifier. As an outcome, she wanted a damp and mould survey.
  5. On 15 February 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It apologised that there were no further investigations or repairs after its December 2022 inspection. It said it would arrange for a surveyor to attend on 22 February 2023 to establish the possible causes of the damp and mould, and arrange any repairs required. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused and promised its damp and mould team would liaise with the resident and oversee all works raised through to completion.
  6. The survey was rescheduled by the resident and rebooked for 6 March 2023. Subsequently, on 30 March 2023, the resident confirmed a survey took place, but she had not heard anything further about this. The landlord apologised for the delay and forwarded her concerns to its repairs teams. It added it had liaised with its damp and mould team who advised they would be in contact with her soon. On 24 July 2023, the resident asked to escalate her complaint to stage 3 as she said she had not heard back from the landlord in months about the ventilation system.
  7. On 23 August 2023 the landlord issued its stage 3 final response. It upheld the complaint and recognised it took too long to rectify the leak and arrange the follow on works. It said the delays resulted in the resident living with damp and mould for 6 months longer than she should have. It said it would take immediate action to install a ventilation system and paid £650 compensation made up of £500 for the distress and worry and £150 for the additional expense of running a dehumidifier. It also identified improvements to its services for plumbing appointments and ensuring that follow-on works after inspections are promptly completed.
  8. The resident referred her complaint to the Ombudsman on 20 August 2024. She said the issues affected the household’s health and had disposed of belongings affected by mould. She added she experienced high electricity costs by running a dehumidifier. She said that while surveyors attended the property with promises to carry out works, nothing came of this, and leaks, damp and mould still persisted. As a resolution, she wanted these resolved, any affected areas too be made good and further compensation to reflect loss of belongings and increased energy costs.

Assessment and findings

The scope of the Ombudsman’s investigation

  1. The Ombudsman recognises the resident’s comments that the damp and mould problems date back to early 2021. While this may be the case, the resident formally complained to the landlord on 12 December 2022. In accordance with paragraph 42.c. of the Scheme, the Ombudsman may not consider a complaint which was not brought to the attention of the landlord as a formal complaint within a reasonable period which would normally be within 12 months of the matters arising. Accordingly, this investigation will focus on the events from December 2021 up until the landlord’s final response of August 2023 and commitments that it made.
  2. The resident advised that the leaks, damp, and mould she experienced impacted the health of the household. It is beyond the remit of this service to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, impacts on health and wellbeing. This would be more appropriately dealt with through the courts. Nonetheless, consideration has been given to the general distress and inconvenience that the situation may have caused and this investigation will therefore consider whether the landlord acted in accordance with its policies and legal obligations and whether it acted fairly in the circumstances.

The landlord’s handling of reports of leaks, damp and mould

  1. The landlord has an obligation under the tenancy agreement to maintain the outside and structure of the property, which includes internal walls.  Additionally, under Section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, the landlord must ensure that the property is fit for human habitation during the term of the tenancy.
  2. The landlord’s repairs policy confirms that it “would adopt a ‘right first-time’ approach, where we proactively manage repairs, and the resident does not have to chase works”. It added that if it needed “to carry out an inspection before ordering a repair, we will be clear that this is the reason for the visit, and will arrange any follow on works promptly. Where works cannot be completed in a single visit, we will proactively schedule appointments for follow up visits and keep the resident informed”. The repairs policy sets out that routine repairs, such as containable leaks, would be responded to within 20 working days.
  3. In this case the leak reported was “water droplets coming through ceilings”. It appeared it was a containable leak and therefore would have been appropriate to treat as a routine repair. Following the report on 1 December 2022, it acted fairly and in line with its policy by attending within 20 working days. It initially inspected on 5 December 2022 and followed up with a plumber attendance on 20 December 2022 where they resolved the leak. This was a satisfactory approach to the report of this leak.
  4. The landlord’s damp mould and leaks policy dated January 2024 outlines that it will treat all reports of leaks, damp, and mould seriously and will take a solution, focused, holistic approach whenever it can, which puts the resident; not just the property, at the centre of the resolution. Its policy adds it will ask key questions to help determine the causes of an issue to help understand the extent of any risk and will follow up with remedial action to solve the problem. It adds it will communicate clearly and keep residents informed of what action it will take, why it is taking it and when it will do this. Where it is unable to take immediate action, it may offer an interim solution and support to limit the impact. The Ombudsman recognises that this policy was not available at the time of the resident’s initial damp and mould reports but is referenced to as a sensible guide.
  5. The resident initially reported damp and mould in autumn 2021 although it is unclear exactly when. The landlord’s repair logs indicate a damp and mould inspection was initially raised on 23 December 2021. However, it is noted this was rescheduled for 3 February 2022 which was subsequently cancelled and it is unclear why. The landlord’s repair logs show its contractor attended to carry out a mould wash and redecorate on 31 March 2022. This was a considerable amount of time since the inspection was initially raised. Further, it is unclear what prompted the 31 March 2022 inspection, or if this related to the initial autumn 2021 report. This may indicate issues with the landlord’s record keeping. Furthermore, there is no suggestion the landlord sought to establish the root cause of the damp and mould. Nor did it keep the resident updated in the intervening time. According to the resident, it simply undertook a mould wash and painted over this.
  6. On 21 June 2022 a work order was raised to inspect damaged brickwork in the kitchen and bathroom. While it is unclear if these works specifically related to the damp and mould, it is noted that the landlord’s contractor suggested that the damp and mould problem was likely due to structural problems. In view of this, it is reasonable to conclude, these works were carried out for this reason. Its repair log suggested this work was completed on 26 July 2022. However, there are no accompanying notes or post-inspection reports to confirm this. This was also a considerable amount of time and outside its 20 working day policy timescale for routine repairs, and the delay likely caused distress and inconvenience.
  7. Following the resident’s report of mould in December 2022, it should have treated this with more urgency and arranged a damp and mould survey, particularly as there were historic reports and previous contractor attendance that year. Although it promptly inspected on 5 December 2022 and identified mould throughout the property and various remedial works needed, it failed to raise these within a reasonable time. This was unfair and despite the landlord promising in its stage 1 response, that its damp and mould team would contact her by 11 January 2023, it failed to do so. This would have caused distress and inconvenience to the resident who likely felt her concerns were being ignored.
  8. On 16 January 2023, she contacted the landlord saying no-one had contacted her and felt that the damp and mould was not caused by a leak as it had been there since autumn 2021. She added the walls were wet to touch and that the hygrometer read 90% and wanted a damp and mould survey. In response, the landlord arranged a survey for March 2023. This was reasonable; however the service has seen no outcome of this inspection and it is unclear what, if any, actions were agreed upon by the landlord. Indeed, although the landlord had inspected in December 2022 and again in March 2023, no repairs were raised. It is also concerning that the inspection of 6 March 2023 does not feature in the landlord’s repair logs.
  9. In its stage 2 response, the landlord apologised for not carrying out further investigations or arranging repairs after its December 2022 attendances. While it was appropriate to apologise, it failed to keep to its commitment to “oversee all works raised through to completion”. This would have caused further distress to the resident and this lack of engagement was a recurring theme through its complaints process, and afterwards.
  10. The landlord has a responsibility for diagnosing and resolving damp and mould in a timely and effective way, where it results from issues that require repair, such as a leak, it should consider undertaking a comprehensive risk assessment. However, this did not happen even after repeated reports. It is therefore unclear if the landlord considered the resident’s “specific circumstance or additional risks” when taking action as per its damp mould and leaks policy. This is concerning as the landlord was aware of the resident’s vulnerabilities and that young children occupied the property.
  11. The resident informed the service that she has fibromyalgia and eye and skin problems. She added her children experience breathing problems which she attributed to the housing conditions. The potential detriment of damp and mould to a resident’s health and wellbeing has been highlighted in the Ombudsman’s October 2021 Spotlight report entitled “Damp and mould: It’s not lifestyle” and that ‘landlords should recognise that issues can have an ongoing detrimental impact on the health and well-being of the resident and should therefore be responded to in a timely manner’ and ‘should consider appropriate timescales for their responses to reflect the urgency of the case and set these out clearly to manage resident’s expectations’. Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System, damp and mould growth is classified as a hazard.
  12. The resident informed the landlord in her complaint that there was black mould in the property affecting her children. While the landlord attended the December 2022 report of a leak in good time, and found a number of issues that needed resolving, it failed to undertake these works such as installing a wall vent and/or airbricks and repairing/replacing the extractor fan in the bathroom and in a reasonable time. There is no evidence these have been completed as per the landlord’s repair logs. The landlord’s inability to co-ordinate and carry out these works likely resulted in distress to the resident. Furthermore, this would have been exacerbated considering the circumstances of the household and the concerns regarding her children’s health.
  13. The resident’s home was redecorated in March 2022, however the resident continued to experience further issues with mould from December 2022. It is unclear if the landlord made good the affected areas following these reports. The resident experienced further leaks in September 2023 and January 2024, and therefore it would be appropriate for the landlord to reinspect the property to ensure it has fully resolved these leaks, damp and mould and carry out redecoration, where appropriate. In light of this, an order has been made in this regard.
  14. The resident reported increased energy costs due to use of a dehumidifier. In line with the landlord’s compensation procedure, it would consider additional electricity usage for example the additional cost of using a dehumidifier when deciding an appropriate level of compensation. While the landlord attempted to put things right by offering £150, it should have requested evidence of increased costs, such as utility bills, to establish the appropriate amount.  Further, given the landlord has yet carried out any meaningful remedial works to prevent further recurrence of damp and mould, it should consider further compensation in this regard and a recommendation has been made for it to do so below.
  15. In the resident’s complaint to this service, she said her belongings had been damaged by mould. This was not raised to the landlord throughout its complaints process. However, it would now be reasonable for the landlord to signpost the resident to make a claim under its liability insurance, if it has not done so already. A recommendation has been made.
  16. The landlord’s final response recommended “immediate action to arrange the installation of a ventilation system”. However, over a year later, this still remains outstanding and the landlord failed to provide evidence to show that it had reasonably progressed these works. The landlord was again not proactive in undertaking follow up works as promised. It is also unclear if the bathroom extractor fan has been replaced/repaired, as does not show as completed in its repairs logs. In fact, a work order for this repair was raised on 16 September 2024, after the resident approached the Ombudsman for assistance. This was a substantial time after this was initially recognised for repair on 5 December 2022 – over 21 months later.
  17. While the landlord apologised for failing to raise repairs in a timely manner and offered £50, the ventilation works still remain outstanding to date. In this case, the complaints process did not serve to move the repairs forward, therefore its apology and offer of compensation did not adequately ‘put things right’. The resident continued to report damp and mould and was not given clear times and dates of when a suitable and lasting repairs would take place, contrary to its policy. Instead of it being proactive, it only appeared to react once the resident contacted it. Indeed, the landlord even suggested internally in February 2024 “if this goes to [the Housing Ombudsman] it won’t look very good”.
  18. Overall, the landlord failed to undertake the necessary works within a reasonable time and failed to keep the resident regularly updated. Further, there is no evidence that the landlord learned from outcomes despite its assurances in its stage 3 response to implement an effective system to ensure work recommended is completed promptly, as the remedial works still remain outstanding to date. The Ombudsman’s remedies guidance suggests  compensation between £600 – £1,000 should be considered where there has been a failure that significantly affected the resident. Noting the impact this has had on the living conditions in the property, with consideration for the young children, the time and effort spent pursuing the matter, and the landlord’s compensation award, the Ombudsman has made several orders below.
  19. In this investigation, there were failures in the landlord’s handling of its repairs and record keeping, similar to those identified in other cases. We have not, however, made any further orders for the landlord to improve this. This is because a wider order was made as part of case 202124577 with which the landlord has now complied. We expect the landlord to take forward the lessons and improvements it shared with this service following the wider order, and we will monitor its progress in doing so.
  20. This service recognises that the resident made new formal complaint in January 2024 about a leak from a neighbouring property. While this complaint does not form part of this assessment, as it was made after the landlord’s August 2023 final response, a recommendation has been made in respect of this.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

  1. At the time of the complaint, the landlord operated a three stage complaints policy:
    1. Stage 1 – where a written response will be issued within 10 working days.
    2. Stage 2 – where a written response will be issued within 20 working days.
    3. Stage 3 – where the complaint is seen by an independent adjudicator and a written response will be issued within 20 working days.
  2. Following the landlord’s stage 2 response, the resident expressed dissatisfaction on 30 March 2023 with its handling of the matter. She said “I have allowed more than enough time for some sort of resolution to me made for the damp and mould/insulation problem” and that she would have “no other choice but to refer this matter on to the housing ombudsman and also a solicitor”.
  3. While the landlord replied on 12 April 2023 and provided information on how to escalate the complaint, this was not necessary and it should have acted in line with its policy by escalating the matter, especially as the landlord should have recognised that the work to install a ventilation system had not progressed. It may have been helpful for the landlord to escalate the matter based on her March 2023 correspondence, nevertheless it provided her information on how to escalate her complaint which was a means for her to take this issue further. The resident did not pursue this again until 24 July 2023. Subsequently, the landlord provided its stage 3 final response within its policy timescales.
  4. Overall, while it would have been more appropriate for the landlord to have raised the residents escalation resident in March 2023, considering the resident did not pursue it again between April and June 2023, and it provide its final response in good time after her escalation request in July 2023. In this case, the landlord’s complaint handling was satisfactory and it provided all of its formal responses within its policy timescales which was appropriate.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of leaks, damp and mould.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. Within 28 calendar days of the date of this report, the landlord must:
    1. Pay the resident a further £400 for the failings identified in the landlord’s handling of reports of leaks, damp and mould.
    2. Inspect the property, and the property above, to ensure it has resolved any active leaks and carried out all the works to an acceptable standard as outlined in its stage 3 response, including installation of ventilation unit. It must ensure any areas affected by leaks, damp and mould are made good, if it has not done so already.
    3. Repair the extractor fans and install wall vent/airbrick, if it has not done so already.
  2. The landlord shall contact the Ombudsman within 28 calendar days to confirm that it has complied with these orders.

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should:
    1. Contact the resident requesting evidence of her increased utility bills for use of a dehumidifier during the period that the assessed repairs were not carried out and consider appropriate reimbursement.
    2. Contact the resident and establish if she wishes to commence a claim on the landlord’s insurer for the damage to her belongings, if it has not done so already.
    3. Formally respond to the resident’s formal complaint of January 2024, if it has not done so already.
  2. The landlord should confirm its intentions in regard to these recommendations to this Service within 28 calendar days of the date of this report.